DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 9, 13-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 9 and 15, the claim requires “a top panel” which is unclear from the specification because the written description does not disclose a top panel in combination with the closure recited in claim 1. It is unclear from the specification if applicant requires a top panel in addition to the closure required in claim 1. Regarding claim 13, the claim requires “at least two separable parts”. However, nowhere in the specification is disclosed a container comprising two separable parts in combination with the required closure in claim 1. Regarding claims 14 and 20, the claims are rejected because inherit the same issue, because of its dependency, of respective claims 13 and 15.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claims 9 and 15, it is unclear what structure of the container is the required “top panel” in combination with the closure as required in claim 1. The claim is indefinite because it is unclear if “top panel” is referring to the same or different structure as the closure of claim 1. Regarding claim 20, the claim is rejected because inherit the same issue, because of its dependency, of respective claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 15, 17, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 107777061) in view of David (11,072,479).
Claim 1
Zhou discloses a container comprising a container body (defined by base 1 and side plates 11-14 extending from the base) which is reversibly and repeatedly reconfigurable between a use/expanded state (see figures 1 and 2) in which the container body forms an internal cavity (4) for receiving content and has an opening (defined by top surface of the side plates) through which the content is able to be inserted to and removed from the internal cavity, and a collapsed/folded state (see figure 4) in which an internal volume of the internal cavity is reduced compared with the use state; a closure (2) which is movable with respect to the container body between a closed position in which it closes the opening and an open position in which the opening is uncovered (see figures 2 and 3); a locking member which is movable between a lock position and an unlock position and which is configured, when in the lock position to electronically, by uses of a communication device software connected to a mobile phone, lock the closure in a closed position, the locking member being configured to release the closure when moved to the unlock position to enable the closure to be moved to an open position (see pages 3 and 4); an inflatable dunnage (3) disposed in the internal cavity and configured to be inflated by injection of gas/air (see page2); an exhaust port (5) communicating with the inflatable dunnage; and an exhaust port shutoff arrangement having a closed state in which it the exhaust port shutoff arrangement closes the exhaust port and an open state in which it the exhaust port shutoff arrangement opens the exhaust port. Zhou disclose the exhaust port is used to adjust gas (see page 3), therefore open and close the exhaust port. Zhou does not disclose the locking member is configured to cooperate mechanically with the exhaust port shutoff arrangement such that moving the locking member from the lock position to the unlock position causes the exhaust port shutoff arrangement to change from the closed state to the open state, whereby pressure in the inflatable dunnage is automatically released through the exhaust port prior to opening of the container. However, David discloses a locking mechanism (defined by pull strip 104 with a string 106) configured to cooperate mechanically with a exhaust port and exhaust port shutoff arrangement/control assembly (60) such that moving the locking member from the lock position to the unlock position causes the exhaust port shutoff arrangement to change from the closed state to the open state, whereby pressure in the inflatable dunnage is automatically released through the exhaust port prior to opening of the container. David discloses by pulling the pull strip, pneumatic panels deflate and the container could be opened (see column 4 lines 34-39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking member of Zhou having a pull strip as taught by David for deflating the dunnage, when opening the container, and easy removing the articles in the container.
Claim 2
After Zhou is modified by David, the strip would be rotatably coupled any of the container body or the closure.
Claim 3
Zhou further discloses the exhaust port shutoff arrangement comprises a bung (defined by string 106) carried on the locking member and arranged to be inserted into the exhaust port by the action of moving the locking member to the lock position, and to be withdrawn from the exhaust port by the action of moving the locking member to the unlock position (see figure 4).
Claim 5
Zhou further discloses an inflation port separate from the exhaust port communicates with the inflatable dunnage for injection of gas thereto. Zhou, figure 2, shows two separate air nozzles, wherein one of them could be the exhaust port and the other could be the inflation port.
Claim 6
Zhou as modified by David discloses the exhaust port shutoff arrangement comprises a rotary-action valve coupled to the locking member such that rotary movement of the locking member opens and closes the rotary action valve. When the pull strip is pulled away, a valve is actuated to deflate the dunnage.
Claim 7
Zhou further discloses the closure comprises a lid hingedly coupled to the container body for movement between the closed position and the open position (see figures 2 and 3).
Claim 9
Zhou further discloses the container body comprises a top panel (defined by dunnage 3 attached to the closure as shown in figures 2 and 3), a bottom panel (1), and a plurality of collapsible side walls (11-14) connecting the top panel to the bottom panel, wherein the side walls being upright in the use state so that the internal volume is defined between the top panel, the bottom panel and the side walls, and the side walls being collapsed in the collapsed state to move the top panel toward the bottom panel (see figures 5 and 6).
Claim 15
Zhou further discloses a top panel (defined by dunnage 3 attached to the closure as shown in figures 2 and 3), a bottom panel (1), a plurality of collapsible side walls (11-14) connecting the top panel to the bottom panel and an opening (defined by top surface of the side plates); wherein the side walls are upright in the use state so that the internal cavity is defined between the top panel, the bottom panel and the side walls into which content is insertable through the opening, and the side walls being collapsed in the collapsed state to move the top panel toward the bottom panel thereby reducing the volume of the container (see figures 5 and 6).
Claim 17
Zhou further discloses the inflatable dunnage is secured to the container body such as to collapse along with it, when deflated, and to fold in an orderly fashion (see figures 1 and 4).
Claim 20
Zhou further discloses at least side wall (11) comprises an upper panel (101) and a lower panel (102), the upper panel having an upper edge which is hingedly connected to the top panel and a lower edge which is hingedly connected to an upper edge of the lower panel, the lower panel having a lower edge which is hingedly connected to the bottom panel (see figures 1, 5 and 6).
Claim 22
Zhou further discloses the container has a depth in the use state which is substantially an integral multiple greater than its depth in the collapsed state (see figures 5 and 6).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 107777061) and David (11,072,479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yan (CN 114194611).
Claims 10 and 11
Zhou does not disclose a rewritable electronic display visible at its exterior. However, Yan discloses a container comprising a cover (20) having a computer control plate (40) visible through a visible display system (90) displaying express signal and related express information. The visible display system is configured to communicate with the computer control plate through a channel in which information will be displayed through the display system (see page 8). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the container of Zhou having a computer visible through a display surface as taught by Yan for direct express control of the container.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 107777061) and David (11,072,479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cutter (US 11,427,385).
Zhou does not disclose upper registration features and complementary lower registration features, as required. However, Cutter discloses a container (100) formed of a box body (defined by bottom 103 and sides (101 and 102) and a cover (110a) comprising upper registration features (111 and 112) and lower registration features (109 and 113) configured such that when two identically formed containers are stacked one upon the other, the upper registration features of one container register with the lower registration features of the other container to maintain the two containers in orderly alignment (see column 12 lines 10-32 and figure 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the container of Zhou having the upper and lower registration features as taught by Cutter for stacking purposes of the container.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 107777061) and David (11,072,479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cheich (CN 105209351).
Zhou does not explicitly disclose the inflatable dunnage comprises back-to-back sheets of flexible impermeable material selectively seamed to form inflatable cells. However, Cheich discloses a dunnage product comprising air bags formed from layers of impermeable material providing insulating properties to the air bag (see page 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inflatable dunnage of Zhou being made from impermeable material as taught by Cheich for insulating properties of the inflatable dunnage.
Claims 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 107777061) and David (11,072,479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vanderberg (US 2011/0272419).
Zhou does not disclose the container is provided with a user-operable and releasable mechanism for locking the container in the collapsed state. However, Vandenberg discloses a collapsible container (1210) comprising an upper rim (1230) that engages and locks with a base (1210) in a collapsed configuration (see [0231], figures 18a and 18b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the container having a lock that engages with a top and bottom of the container as taught by Vandenberg to maintain in collapsed configuration the container when it is needed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 24 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAFAEL A. ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5240. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Orlando E. Aviles can be reached at 571-270-5531. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
RAFAEL A. ORTIZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3736
/RAFAEL A ORTIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3736